## **An Overview of the History of Romanian Press** 

## **Dan Valeriu Voinea[*] , Xenia Negrea**, Bianca Teodorescu***** 

> *Assistant, Ph.D., University of Craiova, Faculty of Letters, Department of Communication Journalism and Education Sciences, no. 13, A.I. Cuza Street, Dolj County, tel. 0723319690, e-mail: me@danvoinea.ro 

**Assistant Professor, Ph.D., University of Craiova, Faculty of Letters, Departament of Communication Journalism and Education Sciences, no. 13, A.I. Cuza Street, Dolj County, tel. 0745567724, e-mail: xenia_karo@yahoo.com 

*** Ph.D. Candidate, University of Craiova, Faculty of Letters, no. 13, A.I. Cuza Street, Dolj County, tel. 0744474976, e-mail: biancteodorescu@gmail.com 

## _**Abstract**_ 

_In this paper we analyze the concept of Romanian press history as it is understood in the Romanian academic field. We theorize that journalism history has two dimensions: a cognitive-taxonomic one and verticaldiachronic one. The two coordinated find their convergence in the identity core of Romanian journalism history. We show that it is a real challenge to reconnect the present with the past through the communist gap. After 1989, Marian Petcu and Ilie Rad became the most important personalities of this field. They created Romanian Association of Press History and they accomplished what we think as essential, e.g. a common consciousness._ 

## **Keywords:** history, press history, current paradigm, press history axis 

**Introduction.** Our title, with interrogative valences, is a sign of a reflection on the current condition of journalism history. It aims, as much possible, to clarify the role and place of press history in an institutional disciplinary board. The approach is represented by the fundamental ontological elements of the discipline: the press history as a specialist, the press statute and functions and the press chronology. 

Any responsible research, self-aware and self-evaluative, occasionally has queries about its existence, mission and renewal. The main way to self-questioning is taken from Ludwig Wittgenstein. After the phenomenology experience, the logical positivism and philosophical hermeneutics, he notes that the discipline of which it belongs must understand the experiences that it got over. Since destiny of a discipline is made of experiences, the reflection on covered experiences brings a refreshing of faith in the persistence of discipline. Ludwig Wittgenstein asks: “ _Why would it be called, what we are doing here, “philosophy”?_ ” (Wittgenstein, 1993, p. 138). Related, also in a reflection of reinternalization of the “history of philosophy” this time, academician Gheorghe Vlăduţescu asks, “ _What for the history of philosophy_ ?” (Vlăduţescu, 2003). In connection with this, our interrogative intercession does not assume any note, form or controversy tint. It wants to be an honest and principled view about the current paradigm of press history. 

**The first paradigm of Press History: the founding paradigm** (Vlăduțescu, 2013). First of all, a discipline is an organized study. In his turn, the study is a determinable and specialized intercession in relation to an object. The intercession can be a science or a theory. Sometimes these specialized intercessions (science and theory) are confused. As cogitative intercession of a specific object, science includes the theories related to component entities of the ontological object. Some sciences and/or theories come to be canonical, i.e. become study discipline in faculties. Other of them attain the state of denominative for the specialized faculties. Faculties, as educational institutions, enroll their mission preparation in field and skills training needed in related area (Smarandache & Vlăduțescu, 2014). 

Translating this epistemological outline in our area of interest, we find that are accredited journalism faculties or journalistic. Within these it is taught the press history or the journalism history. The current figure of the journalism history is given by the current paradigm of discipline. 

Thomas Kuhn, who accredited the concept of paradigm, shows that this designates an exemplary way of doing science. The paradigm has two coordinates: a scientific community and a particular science. As stated T. Kuhn “paradigms [...] for a time provide model problems and model solution to a community of practitioners” (Kuhn, 1970, p. IX). 

1 

The paradigm of a moment presents a thematic, issue and a specific ideational. Also, it is distinguished by models, procedures, techniques and technologies. The social dimension of the paradigm is the scientific community of theoreticians, practitioners and researchers of the discipline. The paradigm accredits, supports and defends its competence domain. Thomas Kuhn summarizes in a double postulated relationship between paradigm and the scientific community: 1. “a paradigm is what the numbers of the scientific community share”, 2. “the scientific community consists of men who share a paradigm” (Kuhn, 1998, p. 176). 

The history of Romanian press has passed the pre-paradigmatic period: one in which there is not a confined scientific community which to concern scheduled and dedicated of the journalism history. Perhaps not coincidentally, this time in our pre-paradigmatic have written important works in the journalism history by Nicolae Iorga (1922), Pamfil Şeicaru (2007), G. Răduică, N. Răduică (1995), M. Petcu (2002), I. Hangiu (2004), M. Petcu (2005), S. Craia (2006). 

Evidentially in the Romanian press history was organized a first real paradigm when, beside the active knowledge fund of the press history discipline was established the scientific community of press history “Romanian Association of Press History”. As it is known the initiator and founder of this association is the academic Marian Petcu. 

To Romanian Press Symposium on November 2005, he advanced the proposal of founding an organization name Romanian Association of Press History that has three primary targets. It was necessary, first, a specialty journal publishing. Then, have to design a museum of Romanian press. Third, it was expected development of a history treaty of Romanian press. Also, Marian Petcu is whoever, subsequently, launched the idea of some national congresses of press history, the works which come in this year to the 7[th] edition. 

In 2007, Professor Marian Petcu finds that the first founder objective was achieved. Referring to his intention to develop “in Romanian Association of Press History” the designed treaty, he stated: “my concern is that ever a work of this dimension will not be achieved in Romania” (M. Petcu, p. 5). As he stated several times, the 2007 fear has been emphasized, so that in 2008 in Arad, “Vasile Goldis” University, he said that is necessary the revise of treaty idea and its replacement by a more accessible project: a work history of the press in Romania in data. Changing the aspiration level is modified after finding that for a treaty there were no specialists. After a sustained effort of four years, a broad collective of contributors led by professor Marian Petcu finished the work _Journalism History of Romania in data. Chronological Encyclopedia_ (Istoria jurnalismului din România în date, 2012). Compared to the original design “press history”, this work of 1416 pages is a “history of journalism”. According to ideational consistency of his edited book _Journalism History of Romania in data. Chronological Encyclopedia (2012)_ both includes written press, radio and television broadcast, and journalist associations from Romania 

In its canonical definition, journalism means people (journalists), journalistic processes and journalistic products. Journalism is an assembly of people, processes and products (Vlăduțescu, 2014; Voinea, Bușu, Opran & Vlăduțescu, 2015). 

Beyond the exceptional value of encyclopedia, there are revealed two ideas that have strengthened related to this and in the atmosphere of its launch. 

The first one is above mentioned by Marian Petcu and strengthened by the Professor Ilie Rad in statement made to launch of encyclopedia on December 2012, in Cluj: “regarding the treaty is more difficult, and experts are less” (Ilie Rad, 2012). Marian Petcu reiterate in same occasion: “I thought this project in 2008 after I found my old obsession - History Treaty of Romanian Press – it will not be performed, we have no specialists in this field”. The explanation he gives is argued: 

- a) “Professional historians have not found the press worthy of becoming the object of research”; 

- b) “Here were in charge of press the literary historians, which was not good, because it was privileged literary press” ( Interview Marian Petcu, Napoca News, 12 Decembrie 2012); 

The work in question was performed, as specified Marian Petcu, “by contribution of 120 experts from public libraries, universities, archives, current and former journalists (for collection),” then “students, master and PhD students (for processing)”. 

2 

On the initiated theoretical route we remember that, in terms of establishment and consolidation of a paradigm of press history, journalism, there is a scientific community, even if, we agree with it: “specialists are fewer” (Ilie Rad, 2012). 

The second idea is one released in this debate favorable atmosphere, encyclopedia launching and in the context of the congress: is the emergence idea of the of a new paradigm of information. Professor Petcu states: “We assist to a paradigm changing, to a reconfiguration of collecting processes, processing, dissemination and consumption of information” (Interview Marian Petcu, Napoca News, 12 decembrie 2012). 

Information is the core of journalism. Romanian journalism history, the history of Romanian press has set up its first paradigm, the paradigm founding. The scientific community of founding paradigm of the journalism history organized into the Romanian Association of Press History. This organization has a statute has a newspaper, is operational and active. It is obvious that by engaging, as much is it, in activities on the course of press journalism history, the specific scientific community proves that there is a common conscious of the discipline. Common consciousness is the essential. 

Within this common consciousness manifests relative unit vision concerning the topics, issues and history of press history journalism history ideational. 

**The press history axis.** What for a history of journalism, of press? Because in the board of journalism there is a major axis: journalism/press history. Aside of journalism ontology (which deals with journalism domain), the journalism epistemology (that is centered on the possibilities and limits of journalistic knowledge) journalism methodology (which deals with journalistic ways, methods, techniques, processes and procedures), journalism ethics (which points journalistic conduct morality), journalism history axis is an essential component of the journalism field, of journalistic theory and practice (Smarandache & Vlăduțescu, 2014; Stănescu, 2015). 

The journalism history has two dimensions. The first dimension is a cognitive-taxonomic and verticaldiachronic. It consists of radiography and catagraphy of the journalistic Romanian phenomenon (journalistic texts, journalistic personalities, journalistic institutions and organs). This conceptual approach of the journalism history is descending one. The historian relies on a top down analysis: he has a concept of what means the journalism and searches in history for environments, places and people where there is concrete this concept (O’Brien, 2014). The second dimension is a horizontal-synchronous, adaptation of the concept to journalistic phenomenal mutations. This approach is one of bottom-up analysis: they take concepts and theorize the phenomena to enhance them, to re-semantics or restructure the operational concept. The two coordinated find their convergence in the identity core of Romanian journalism history discipline within the current paradigm (Negrea, 2014): condition of historical of journalism, the chronology of press operators appearance, the role specificity and the journalist behavior, journalistic discourse status, journalistic text characteristics, journalistic function development of the texts in time, the dialectic report of journalistic text generation vs. journalist, journalist vs. journalistic text, journalist text vs. journalistic function, language standards and interpretation of the journalistic text, thinking criteria of the text-message that has journalistic function (Ładyga & Lovasova, 2015). 

**Conclusion.** Therefore what we do here is called history of journalism, history of press because it is relatively convergent manifestation of common knowledge of a community of theoreticians, researchers and practitioners of journalism history, directly and solely or collateral and connected. 

## **Bibliography** 

Craia, S., _Presa şi societatea la români. O istorie a mentalităţilor în periodicele româneşti. Sentimente, prejudecăţi, atitudini_ , Târgovişte, Editura Bibliotheca, 2006. 

Hangiu, Ion, _Dicţionarul presei literare româneşti, 1790-2000_ , Iaşi, Editura Institutul Cultural Român, 2004. 

Iorga, Nicolae, _Istoria presei româneşti de la primele începuturi până la 1916,_ Bucureşti, 

Atelierele Societăţii Anonime „Adevărul”, 1922. 

Kuhn, Thomas, _The structure of scientific revolutions_ (2nd ed.), Chicago University Press, 1970. 

3 

Kuhn, Thomas, _The structure of scientific revolutions_ (3rd ed.), Chicago University Press, 1998. 

Ładyga, Marek, Lovasova, Ruzena, The Method of Balancing the Production and Consumption Model in the Case of Indivisible Goods. _Polish Journal of Management Studies_ , 11(2), 83-90, 2015. 

Negrea, Xenia, Credibility-an Honest Claim in the Current Romanian Press. _Social Sciences and Education Research Review_ , _1_ (2), 45-51, 2014. 

Negrilă, Iulian. _Istoria presei_ , Multimedia, 1997. 

O'Brien, Jim, Football and Spanish Cultural Life; Some contemporary perspectives and observations. _Social Sciences and Education Research Review_ , _1_ (1), 36-43, 2014. 

Petcu, Marian, _Jurnalist în România. Istoria unei profesii_ , Bucureşti, Comunicare.ro., 2005. 

Petcu, Marian, _Istoria jurnalismului din România în date. Enciclopedia cronologică_ , Iaşi, Editura Polirom, 2012. 

Petcu, Marian, _Interviu,_ Napoca News, 12 decembrie 2012. 

Rad, Ilie, _Secvențe din istoria presei românești_ , Tribuna, 2007. 

Rad, Ilie, _Interviu_ , Napoca News, 12 decembrie 2012. 

Răduică, Georgeta, Răduică, Nicolin, _Dicţionarul presei româneşti (1731-1918)_ , Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică, 1995. 

Smarandache, Florentin, Vlăduțescu, Ștefan, Towards a Practical Communication Intervention. _Revista de cercetare şi intervenţie socială_ , (46), 243-254, 2014. 

Şeicaru, Pamfil, _Istoria presei_ , Piteşti, Editura Paralela 45, 2007. 

Stănescu, Georgiana Camelia, Telejustice – a phenomenon at the border between the right to information of the public and the right to image of accused persons. _Social Sciences and Education Research Review_ , 2(1), 91-99, 2015. 

Vişinescu, Victor, _O istorie a presei româneşti_ , Bucureşti, Editura Victor, 2000. 

Vlăduţescu, Gheorghe, _Pentru ce istoria filosofiei_ , Editura Paideia, Bucureşti, 2003. 

Vlăduțescu, Ștefan, _De ce s-ar numi ce facem noi aici Istoria presei românești /Istoria jurnalismului din România/ și pentru ce?_ În R. Bîlbîie, F. Șperlea & M. Teodor (Coord), Jurnalismul, o preocupare a elitei. _Studii și cercetări de istorie a presei_ (pp. 19-25). București: Editura Tritonic, 2013. 

Vlăduţescu, Ştefan, Considerations on Voice as a Fundamental Element in Oral Communication. _Analele Universităţii din Craiova. Seria Ştiinţe Filologice. Lingvistică_ , (1-2), 355-363, 2013. 

Voinea, Dan Valeriu, Bușu, Oprea Valentin, Opran, Elena Rodica, & Vlăduțescu, Ștefan, Embarrassments in Managerial Communication. _Polish Journal of Management Studies_ , 11(2), 171-180, 2015. 

Wittgenstein, Ludwig, _Caietul albastru_ , Bucureşti, Editura Humanitas, 1993. 

4